Gerakan backs call to cap defamation awards
Leong Kar YenPublished: Mar 1, 2001 11:23 AM | Updated: Jan 29, 2008 6:21 PM
Parliament should debate and formulate laws to put a lid on the high damages which have been awarded in defamation suits to curb such practices of demanding "ridiculous sums in compensation", a Gerakan leader said today.
"It would certainly help if the legislature sees it fit to debate and subsequently formulate certain guidelines that would evolve into laws to address this controversial subject," said Gerakan vice-president Dr S Vijayaratnam.
Minister in the Prime Minister's office Dr Rais Yatim told reporters yesterday that the government would review and legislate on defamation cases if there is a strong public outcry. ([#1]Government prepared to legislate a cap on defamation awards[/#], Feb 28)
"Perhaps it is not good for the society to remain neutral on this issue and if societal feelings are strong enough, meaning if representations are made to the government, we will not be reluctant to review it," he said.
Last week local television station TV3 was ordered by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to pay damages of RM100 million to businessman Badrul Zaman PS Md Zakariah when the latter sued over a news broadcast which allegedly depicted visuals of him in handcuffs while he was in remand for allegedly not operating a genuine employment agency.
Badrul is also suing nine local dailies and the government for a total sum of RM1.3 billion ([#2]Nine dailies and government sued for RM1.3 billion[/#], Feb 2).
Unreasonable
Vijayaratnam said that while individuals must be careful of what they say as well as write, the aggrieved parties must also be reasonable in asking for damages that commensurate with the offence.
"While not condoning irresponsible and tarnishing utterances by certain reckless individuals, one must at the same time, pause to consider as to whether the reaction by the aggrieved party is consistent with the offence," he said.
"To leave it as it is now, with no rules specifying quantum, and throwing it open to the whims and fancies of the plaintiff, may not be such a good thing," he added.
Vijayaratnam conceded that the final decision should be left up to the presiding judge as to how much damages is to be awarded.
"It is his Lordship who can exercise a tempering and moderating influence on what the defamation in question is really worth.
"It would certainly help if the legislature sees it fit to debate and subsequently formulate certain guidelines that would evolve into laws to address this controversial subject," said Gerakan vice-president Dr S Vijayaratnam.
Minister in the Prime Minister's office Dr Rais Yatim told reporters yesterday that the government would review and legislate on defamation cases if there is a strong public outcry. ([#1]Government prepared to legislate a cap on defamation awards[/#], Feb 28)
"Perhaps it is not good for the society to remain neutral on this issue and if societal feelings are strong enough, meaning if representations are made to the government, we will not be reluctant to review it," he said.
Last week local television station TV3 was ordered by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to pay damages of RM100 million to businessman Badrul Zaman PS Md Zakariah when the latter sued over a news broadcast which allegedly depicted visuals of him in handcuffs while he was in remand for allegedly not operating a genuine employment agency.
Badrul is also suing nine local dailies and the government for a total sum of RM1.3 billion ([#2]Nine dailies and government sued for RM1.3 billion[/#], Feb 2).
Unreasonable
Vijayaratnam said that while individuals must be careful of what they say as well as write, the aggrieved parties must also be reasonable in asking for damages that commensurate with the offence.
"While not condoning irresponsible and tarnishing utterances by certain reckless individuals, one must at the same time, pause to consider as to whether the reaction by the aggrieved party is consistent with the offence," he said.
"To leave it as it is now, with no rules specifying quantum, and throwing it open to the whims and fancies of the plaintiff, may not be such a good thing," he added.
Vijayaratnam conceded that the final decision should be left up to the presiding judge as to how much damages is to be awarded.
"It is his Lordship who can exercise a tempering and moderating influence on what the defamation in question is really worth.
View Comments0